Worked example 1
Officers stop Marcus on suspicion of burglary, search his bag, find tools, arrest him, and detain him for 30 hours without allowing a solicitor. Marcus is 17. Identify PACE issues and whether evidence may be excluded. [10 marks]
Show solution outline
Issue: Legality of stop/search, arrest, detention, and Marcus's rights as a minor.
Stop and search (s1 PACE): Lawful if officers had reasonable grounds to suspect stolen/prohibited articles linked to burglary. Must comply with Code A — grounds recorded, ethnic monitoring, search conducted appropriately.
Arrest (s24): Requires offence committed + necessity (e.g. to allow prompt investigation). Tools may support arrest if linked to burglary.
Detention: Standard limit 24 hours; extension to 36 hours needs superintendent's authorisation. The 30-hour detention is unlawful without this authorisation. Furthermore, detention reviews are required at 6 hours, then every 9 hours. A 30-hour detention without review is a breach of s40 PACE.
Legal advice (s58): Denial of a solicitor is a very serious breach. Delay is only permissible in limited cases for indictable offences and requires authorisation. A blanket denial for 30 hours is unlawful.
Appropriate adult: Marcus is 17 — Code C requires an appropriate adult for all key procedures, including interviews. Interviewing him without one would be a major breach.
Exclusion: Under s78 PACE, a court may exclude evidence if its admission would have an adverse effect on fairness. Given the multiple, serious breaches (detention length, denial of solicitor, no appropriate adult), there is a strong argument to exclude any confession Marcus made. The physical evidence (tools) may still be admissible if the initial search was lawful, as per R v Sang.